Is India a Socialist country? India has opened almost all boundaries to become a liberalised economy, likely to achieve double-digit growth and attracting flux of foreign investors in the 21st century.

Does the country has any socialist culture left in it? The word ‘Socialist’ was added in the preamble of the Constitution of India during Emergency days through the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution.

Senior Advocate Fali S Nariman, appearing for the petitioner, said that introducing the word ’socialist’ in the Preamble actually breaches its basic structure and it is wholly inconsistent.

The attempt to deliberately tunnel the collective view in one ideological direction is also a grave breach of the liberty provisions of the Constitution.

However, the Supreme Court, on Tuesday, rejected a PIL filed in the court urging the deletion of the word ’socialist’ from the Constitution.

The apex court bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justice R V Raveendran and Justice J M Panchal asked the petitioner, Sanjiv Agarwal of the Kolkatta-based NGO ‘Good Governance India Foundation’:

Why do you take socialism in a narrow sense defined by the Communists. In broader sense, it means welfare measures for the citizens. It is a facet of democracy. It hasn’t got any definite meaning. It gets different meaning in different times.

The petitioner had urged the court to delete the word ‘Socialist’ from the Preamble by saying that it was not a part of the original Constitution that had been drafted by Dr B R Ambedkar.

The NGO had also urged the court to strike down the Sec 29A of the Representation of People Act (RPA) because it forces the political parties to swear fealty to socialism to be recognized in the country. Agarwal said: “The position now is that any party that does not subscribe to socialism cannot be registered. We have challenged this.

The SC bench later accepted the PIL regarding the provision of the Representation of People Act (RPA). The court also issued notices to the Centre and the Election Commission in this matter. Mariman said that it was contrary to the Constitution and to the democratic foundations that political parties were forced to swear allegiance to a particular ideology.